Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] libswresample: avoid s16p internal processing format

[Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5501 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 07:01:06PM +0100, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 6:25 PM Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 11:08:25PM +0100, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 9:53 PM Michael Niedermayer <
> > michael@niedermayer.cc>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 01:44:10PM +0100, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> > > > > Patch attached.
> > > >
> > > > >  swresample.c |    3 ++-
> > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > eee7a0685b44aa867562138a2e2437ecb8844612
> > > > 0001-libswresample-swresample-avoid-s16p-internal-transfe.patch
> > > > > From 9c4cd60e2dd41cf98d693c8251f4cfade0807073 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001
> > > > > From: Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com>
> > > > > Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2023 13:40:12 +0100
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH] libswresample/swresample: avoid s16p internal
> > transfer
> > > > format
> > > > >
> > > > > Instead use float one by default for sample rate conversions.
> > > > > The s16p internal transfer format produces visible and hearable
> > > > > quantization artifacts.
> > > >
> > > > When does this occur and why?
> > > >
> > >
> > > It occurs always. Just compare output with 16bit and int32/float/double.
> > > Look at other people report on internet.
> > > Look at src.infinitewave.ca
> >
> > src.infinitewave.ca uses 32bit none of what it shows should touch the
> > codepath
> > you change.
> >
> > if we look at src.infinitewave.ca for swr we see 2 types of artifacts
> > 1. Aliassing which is at maybe -120db with the actual signal at 0db
> >    i would like to see some evidence that a human can hear this
> >
> 
> For s16p<->s16p it is much lower, around -78dB thus this patch.

ok but you pointed to the website that apparently uses >=32bit if i trust
what they write.
And even if they test this i cannot use that website to replicate the issue
and the fix 

I just wanted to know how i can test this. You are testing it too ...
so i can see what you see
Id like to make sure this is the correct fix for the problem and
Id like to make sure its used when it makes sense and not when not.


> 
> Also for others and reports for swr its is lower than exact -120dB

The 120 was by "eye" from teh chart on  the web i didnt meassure it


> 
> 
> 2. Reflection and attenuation at the transition frequency
> > With linear filters there is a tradeof between attenuation of the
> > passband, reflection of frequencies beyond, latency and so on
> > You can have a perfect sharp cutoff with no attenuation and no refelection
> > that requires a infinitly long filter. And while this looks best in this
> > frequency plot, does it actually sound best ? If you can hear -120db
> > signals you surely would then also hear the ringing long before a gunshot
> > from such long filter.
> >
> > also what actually is the optimal frequency response of this filter ?
> > with a 22khz cutoff, a 22.1khz sine should be silence is that
> > really subjectively better than a 21.9khz sine ?
> > Iam not sure about this. Has someone done actual hearing tests with
> > actual real audio? the sinc filter originates from the idea of lossless
> > reconstruction of frequencies below nyquist if iam not mistaken, but humans
> > are not trying to losslessly restore a block of frequencies. A human
> > listener
> > generally wants to enjoy listening to some media. Has someone looked into
> > what is actually best for that real use case ?
> > This question matters because with it we can tune the filter parameters to
> > target humans.
> >
> > But lets push the doubts about choosing resampling purely based on
> > frequency
> > analysis away.
> > swresample has several parameters with which you can tune this:
> > we have a filter_size, if thats bigger you should get closer to the ideal
> > sinc. Theres phase_shift which may reduce the (i assume) unhearable
> > aliasing.
> > And cutoff which should allow to tune the (i assume) hearable
> > reflection/attenuation tradeoff also theres filter_type to allow you to
> > tune the
> > window function.
> >
> > If there are issues reported by people using their ears, please provide
> > more
> > details, iam interrested in these cases.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > This change should be limited to the case that benefits, this would
> > force
> > > > this
> > > > even without resampling in some cases.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is forced only if sample rates between input and output differs.
> >
> > If iam not mistaken it affects rematrixing without resampling too
> >
> 
> How so?
> I really doubt that this patch do that.

I could be missing something but 
int_sample_fmt is set to before 16bit and afterwards 32bit
and alot of things are using this:
    set_audiodata_fmt(&s->postin, s->int_sample_fmt);
    set_audiodata_fmt(&s->midbuf, s->int_sample_fmt);
    set_audiodata_fmt(&s->preout, s->int_sample_fmt);

rematrix seems using these
            swri_rematrix(s, preout, midbuf, out_count, preout==out);
...
            swri_rematrix(s, midbuf, postin, in_count, midbuf==out);
            
so i assumed that this patch makes a difference for it. Again i could be missing
something
            
thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the
dead. -- Aristotle 

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".